April 21, 2004
While I was at the doctor's office a few days ago, I happened upon a business card. It had the words "HELP" emblazoned across the front of the card and a website on the back. This was not the first Tort Reform flyer I'd happened upon, but maybe the first one I paid attention to. Matter of fact, I might never have seen the flyer or the card were I not a victim of the very thing the article wrote about.
Victim is a strong word, but how would you feel if you had just undergone a scary and sometimes dangerous lung biopsy and had your surgeon say that he could tell just by looking at the CT scan that the tumor was malignant? Not only that, the results of the biopsy were as conclusive as a home pregnancy test. The doctor says, "Until we operate and take it out, we will never know exactly..." I thought that's what the biopsy was for!! Well, I guess not.
It turns out the biopsy is for "just in case," and I decide to press charges against my doctor. I could just see my doctor sweating in the witness booth, my prosecuting attorney waving papers and questioning, "But Dr. Sonso, did you ever actually perform a lung biopsy on your patient?"
See, this way, with the mostly inconclusive lung biopsy done and over with, my attorney can't nail him to a wall. Everyone's happy, well, except me who didn't need to go through the trauma of a collapsed lung for a stupid expensive test I didn't need. Can I sue my future attorney for damages? I support Tort reform.
Published: April 30, 2004